Re: [TLS] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-09.txt

At this point I don't want to open up other sections of the document for
changes as it is fairly far along and we need to publish the document. I
don't see overwhelming support to change it.  

Thanks,

Joe
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tls-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:tls-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos
> Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 7:10 AM
> To: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org
> Cc: tls@ietf.org; i-d-announce@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [TLS] I-D Action:draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-09.txt
> 
> Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote:
> > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
> directories.
> > This draft is a work item of the Transport Layer Security Working
Group
> of the IETF.
> >
> >
> > 	Title           : Transport Layer Security (TLS) Extensions:
> Extension Definitions
> > 	Author(s)       : D. Eastlake 3rd
> > 	Filename        : draft-ietf-tls-rfc4366-bis-09.txt
> > 	Pages           : 31
> > 	Date            : 2010-06-11
> >
> > This document provides specifications for existing TLS extensions.
It
> > is a companion document for the TLS 1.2 specification [RFC5246]. The
> > extensions specified are server_name, max_fragment_length,
> > client_certificate_url, trusted_ca_keys, truncated_hmac, and
> > status_request.
> 
> It has been mentioned before, but I think its worthwhile to bring it
up
> again. The "Maximum Fragment Length" extension only allows setting a
> fragment length that is lower than 2^14... Why not allow larger sizes
> than that?
> 
> 
> regards,
> Nikos
> _______________________________________________
> TLS mailing list
> TLS@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls